Litigator of the Week: Dallas Attorney Convinces Houston Federal Judge Not to Grant Class Cert Against AT&T
And to win that ruling, Thad Behrens had to best Tony Buzbee, one of Texas' most successful trial attorneys, who represents the plaintiffs in the case.
October 08, 2018 at 04:01 PM
4 minute read
Had defense attorney Thad Behrens recently lost a recent ruling before a Houston federal judge, his client AT&T might have been forced to dig up 200 miles of underground cable and potentially pay over $35 million in damages to a proposed class involving hundreds of property owners.
Yet Behrens recently convinced U.S. District Judge Al Bennett that there weren't enough common issues in the case to justify granting class action certification against the telecommunications giant.
And to win that ruling, he had to best Tony Buzbee, one of Texas' most successful trial attorneys, who represents the plaintiffs in the case.
The case, Cook v. AT&T, centers around communication cables that were buried under land owners' property pursuant to easements granted in the 1950s on various properties spanning the 200 miles between Houston and Dallas/Fort Worth.
Seven plaintiffs filed the case alleging that deteriorating cable was leaking lead and copper onto their property. The plaintiffs proposed a class made up of hundreds of property owners whose land has been encumbered by an AT&T easement.
They also sought declaratory relief, arguing that because AT&T had abandoned its rights to the easements, it had the duty to remove the cable from under their properties.
In his decision, Bennett concluded the case was not appropriate for class certification because of the dissimilarities between the hundreds of properties at issue.
“If plaintiffs could show that one easement had been abandoned by some definite act other than retirement (nonuse) of an underground cable, this answer would not necessarily determine that all hundred plus easements pertinent to the class have also been abandoned,” Bennett wrote in his decision. “Accordingly, the difference in the properties and the easements attached to them dissuade the court of its ability to generate common answers to the contentions of the class. Therefore, certification of the class fails on commonality.”
Bennett also ruled that the plaintiffs would be required to put on individual proof that the cable had leaked contaminates on their property to prove their claims.
“Highly individualized issues of both causation and damages that predominate over common issues make class certification inappropriate,” he wrote.
Behrens was pleased with Bennett's ruling.
“We appreciate Judge Bennett's thoughtful opinion denying class certification, which we believe is entirely correct,” Behrens said. “In addition, we believe the claims of the individual plaintiffs are without merit. We sampled soil on the individual plaintiffs' properties and found no evidence that lead or any other metal have leached from AT&T's cable.”
Behrens, a partner in Dallas' Haynes and Boone, leads a litigation team in the case which includes partner Mark Trachtenberg, associates Michelle Jacobs and Billy Marsh and AT&T in-house lawyers Paul Drummond and Len Briley. He said they all have very high regard for Buzbee and his firm.
“We're used to being against the very best in our kind of cases and have a great deal of respect for him and his firm,'' Behrens said.
Buzbee doubts his clients will appeal the ruling.
“Class action practice in Texas and the Fifth Circuit is essentially dead and has been for years. Until there is a wholesale change in the appellate courts I don't see that changing,” Buzbee said. “I don't think it's a stretch to say the case was a long shot in this jurisdiction. We did our best.”
“I thought that if a case can still be certified in Texas, it would be this one. The judge, who is a fair and thoughtful person, disagreed,” Buzbee said. “As my law professor used to say, 'reasonable minds sometimes differ.'”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All5th Circuit Rules Open-Source Code Is Not Property in Tornado Cash Appeal
5 minute readTexas Court Invalidates SEC’s Dealer Rule, Siding with Crypto Advocates
3 minute readSamsung Flooded With Galaxy Product Patent Lawsuits in Texas Federal Court
Republican Who Might Become FTC's Next Chair Blasts Democratic Commissioners' 'All Mergers Are Bad' Mindset
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Impact of Erlinger on Predicate Felony Sentencing Statutes
- 2To Ease Partner Pay Tensions, Some Law Firms Are Seeking 'Middle Ground' in Transparency
- 3How Legal Aid and Tech Collaboration Can Bridge the Justice Gap
- 4The Rise of AI-Generated Deepfakes: A New Cybersecurity Threat for Law Firms
- 5Litigation Leaders: Labaton’s Eric Belfi on Running Case Investigation, Analysis and Evaluation In-House
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250